Study Bava Batra folio 81B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
What is the rationale of R' Meir that in the case of one tree, an individual is obligated to bring first fruits but does not recite the passage, and what is the rationale of the Rabbis that in the case of two trees, an individual is obligated to bring the first fruits but does not recite the passa
Rabba said: What is the difficulty? Perhaps R' Meir is uncertain, in the case of an individual who purchases one tree, whether or not the buyer owns the ground, and the Rabbis are uncertain, in the case of an individual who purchases two trees, whether or not the buyer owns the ground. Due to this
The Talmud asks: And is R' Meir really uncertain whether the buyer owns the ground? But it teaches: Since he did not acquire any land; this is the statement of R' Meir. R' Meir states definitively that the owner of the tree does not own the ground. The Talmud answers: Say that the baraita should b
The Talmud asks: But let us be concerned that perhaps these fruits are not first fruits, and he is bringing non-sacred fruit to the Temple courtyard, which is prohibited. The Talmud answers: The case is where he consecrates them. The Talmud asks: But the priest is required to eat first fruits, and
The Talmud asks: Granted, the teruma gedola that he separates from these fruits he gives to a priest, and the priest may partake of it, as it has the halakhic status of either first fruits or teruma gedola, both of which are eaten by a priest. It is understood with regard to the second tithe as we